Newly Empowered Democrats Draw Wrath Of Voters

[kurtyboy]

Source: NY Times

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The new Democratic-led Congress is drawing the ire of voters upset with its failure to quickly deliver on a promise to end the Iraq war.

This is reflected in polls that show Congress -- plagued by partisan bickering mostly about the war -- at one of its lowest approval ratings in a decade. Surveys find only about one in four Americans approves of it.

"I understand their disappointment," said Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada. "We raised the bar too high."

<snip>

"If Democrats fail to reverse course, the dynamics in the 2008 elections may shift significantly, allowing Republicans to run as the party of change ... only two years after Democrats successfully campaigned on that same theme," Senate Republican leaders told their ranks in a letter last week.



Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/washington/politics-usa-congress-war.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

---

Turning strength to weakness--the GOP plan for the last three decades....

Um, folks, how about we rally 'round and take back the government in this next cycle and ignore the spinners who would divide us from within?

[acmavm]

1. Um, how about the dems to what they were elected to do and

quit making so damn many excuses for themselves.

Take my word for it, 'hearings' that come to nothing MEAN NOTHING.

[Solly Mack]

3. what you said

especially this part:

"Take my word for it, 'hearings' that come to nothing MEAN NOTHING."

[cascadiance]

80. The problem is they did what they were "elected to do" for the corporate lobbyists!

Getting financed in their elections is more important than their poll ratings unfortunately now.

Absolute MUST for 2008 is to get a congress and a president in that will prioritize getting in place public campaign financing! We need to DEMAND it! It has to come from the grass roots as it will come from no other place since everyone but the grass roots is a "special interest" that doesn't want to "lose power" if such a system is put in place.

[silverojo]

89. They don't have enough votes to do anything

They needed 60 Dems in the Senate, and they knew that they couldn't get that many elected. So they knew that there was no way to override Bush's veto...unless they were seriously stupid enough to believe that some Republicans would cross the aisle and vote against the war.

Never promise more than you can deliver. :(

[pat_k]

94. They have enough to vote out articles of impeachment.

They promised us a fight. They can deliver a fight, but it's gotta be a fight for something REAL.

The American people want Bush stopped. Now. Impeaching Bush and Cheney is the ONLY way to give us what we want. The fight to impeach and remove is the ONLY fight that counts.

When they get serious about impeachment, we may never find out whether or not there would have been enough votes in the Senate to remove. It may never get to a vote in the Senate. Republicans will be pulling out all the stops to escape being forced to stand in judgment. We could see Bush and Cheney resign in a week.

When specific charges are "on the table" -- charges Senators MUST pass judgment on (unless they escape by forcing Bush and Cheney to resign) -- the outcome is wide open. We have NO IDEA how many will be more than happy to "distance" themselves by tossing the Pariah in Chief overboard or how many will be willing to stand and defend torture and the unitary authoritarian executive's "right" to render Congress powerless (i.e., nullify the laws they pass with the stroke of a pen; violate U.S. Code at whim; pick and choose the laws they enforce or ignore. . . they've done it all).

Whatever the outcome, it is ALWAYS good politics to play offense and force the opposition into a defensive position. Leaders who stand and fight for principle, win or lose, ALWAYS win points with the American people.

The price of continuing the pretense that something short of impeachment can stop the outlaws will be high. Reality is already smacking them in the face. Let's hope it wakes them up before their failure to impeach destroys them.

The choice is simple.

They can fulfill their oath to "support and defend", break their bonds of complicity, AND reap enormous political rewards by demonstrating strength and commitment to principle.
Or
They can be derelict in their duty, continue to give Bush and Cheney cover, AND pay a high political price for their weakness and moral confusion.

[Clovis Sangrail]

105. oh gawd.. please stop with this crap

I'm sick of hearing about how they can't do anything because they don't enough votes.

The republicans didn't have 60 in the Senate 2004 or 2002 or 2000 and they seemed capable of ramming their agenda through.... and they now seem equally capable of derailing legislation... without 60 votes.

[Warpy]

2. I'm withholding judgment until September

when Stupid has to come begging for his WAH again. If the Democrats don't point to the unmet benchmarks from May as proof that the war is an unwinnable fiasco and insist on a timetable for withdrawal, they will be finished. They will lose in 2008.

It doesn't matter how many times Stupid vetoes those timetables.

They have to be sent and the Democrats have to insist upon them.

If they don't, people will stay home in 2008 and the fundies will control another election.

[William769]

7. Agreed.

[Javaman]

22. I judge them now. The longer we wait the more people get killed. nt

[pat_k]

23. <moved>

[pat_k]

24. Too bad for the Dems that their failure to impeach. . .

. . .and continued impotent gestures (and ANYTHING short of impeachment is impotent gesture) will drive Congressional approval even lower between now and then. Too bad that every week they refuse to impeach, another 20 servicemen and women will die (far more if current trends continue). Too bad that every week they refuse to impeach, another 150 will be injured and maimed.

[atreides1]

25. There won't be any begging

You can bet that the administration is already working on a campaign similar to the one they used to get the Democrats to back down on the supplement!

The best hope is that the Democrats use Bush's veto threat on increases in veteran's spending to force the little dictator to come to the bargaining table. If the Democrats fail this time, then 2008 will be a fiasco for the country and the world.

Let's hope that the Democrats start using some of that powder that they've tried so hard to keep dry over the last few years!!!!!!

[harun]

45. I agree, they need to set that date

then if there is a vetoe move the date one day and send it right back. Make him spend every day of the rest of his term vetoing that bill if they have to. The voters demand it.

[Double T]

4. The Democrats are NOT going to be given a 'mulligan' for this.......

Congressional term. They had better get their act together and start producing positive results or 2008 will be lost; opportunity has been handed to them and they better not blow it.

[pat_k]

26. Impeachment is the ONLY effective weapon in their arsenal. . .

. . .against men who have proven over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over again that nothing short of removal can stop them -- not our Constitution, not our laws, not the overwhelming will of the people, not investigation and exposure of their intolerable acts.

Only impeachment is capable of stopping them. Win or lose, it is the only act that is meaningful. (And when the Republicans are forced to answer charges of REAL, undeniable, and intolerable crimes against our constitutional democracy, many will be unwilling to defend the Pariah in Chief and his puppet master.)

Anything else they do is impotent gesture. They know their acts are all show and no substance. And the American people know it too.

[rodeodance]

5. That is the problem as the Senate really is NOT empowered!!

[pat_k]

27. The heck they aren't. . .

. . .Each and every one of them has a mouth. A voice. A pen. Any Senator could stand up tomorrow and call on the House to impeach for torture; to impeach for abusing signing statements to render them powerless (as he did with McCain's anti-torture amendment, which the Senate passed 90-9); to impeach for illegally spying; to impeach for arrogating unto themselves Un-American and unconstitutional powers with their fascist fantasy that the American presidency has unitary authoritarian power to break our law at whim "to protect us."

Their position gives them a megaphone. If they used it to call for the immediate impeachment of Bush and Cheney, the talking heads of the 24 hour infotainment outlets would be talking of nothing else. If the House responds with impeachment hearings to lay out the case (there is NOTHING to investigate, only present) the air waves would be covering little else.

Powerless my ass.

[DrDan]

6. they could not even pull together an AG placebo

No wonder impeachment is off the table. They have their own heads so far buried in the sand that they will not even notice when they lose the majority.

What do they have that they can claim as a success. Minimum wage? - that is all I can think of. A few useless (so far) hearings. As much of a failure as junior is, his last 6-7 months have been more successful that this useless democratic congress. We would have been better off remaining the minority - which I have a feeling we will be returning to.

[pat_k]

28. Of course not. They didn't go all the way and impeach. . .

Their little impotent show was a gift to Republicans.

When, instead of sending articles of impeachment to the floor of the House, they pushed their finger-wagging "no confidence" resolution, they proved their impotence. Even if they had passed the resolution in the House and the Senate with a veto-proof majority, Bush's dismissive reation, and Gonzales continued "service" to the outlaws in the WH, would have made the impotence of the Democratic Congress crystal clear to the public.

Their "no confidence" resolution handed the Republicans a fantastic way escape having to respond to the accusations against the administration. They handed the Republicans a perfect stick to beat them with.

They could have done something REAL. They could have impeached Bush, Cheney, and Gonzales (why just go after the puppet, when the puppet masters have committed so many impeachable offenses the House could vote out a new set of Articles every month until the Senate tosses them out).

Gonzales gate isn't just about "politicizing" the justice department. It's about corrupting the justice department to STEAL ELECTIONS. It's about violating the principle of consent, the SOLE moral principle on which the USA is founded.

Instead of forcing Republican members of the House and Senate to respond to the accusations, the fact that the resolution could force action gave the Repubs an out that works -- the question "Why vote?" resonates. I imagine that I'm not the only one thinking "Here's something else for Bush to steamroll over. Oh boy." The reality is that it wasn't an attempt to actually DO anything, so labeling it "gamesmanship " works. Perhaps if a toothless resolution was the only weapon they had, they'd get a pass. But it isn't. We gave them the power to swiftly remove officials who betray us or pose an intolerable threat to the nation.

Of course, the corruption of the justice dept isn't about Gonzales. It's about Bush. It's about Cheney. The only "potent" action is impeachment, but impeaching Gonzales and refusing to go after the ones who pull his strings is impossible to logically reconcile.

Of course, if the House wakes up and impeaches Bush and Cheney, Republicans can try to escape having to answer the charges with claims that it's a "waste of time" or "has no chance of passing" but that won't cut it for long. They have to vote on the charges. T They have to choose: toss the pariah in cheif overboard or take an stand to defend the Bushkid, torture, and criminal spying .

With "the decider" at the helm, the only gesture that is NOT impotent gesture is impeachment. As long as they fail to impeach, each impotent gesture they make is just another chance for Republicans to point out how impotent their impotent gestures are.

Perhaps, as they try to figure out why their approval has been in free fall, they'll wake up and see that "It's the impeachment, Stupid!"

I sure hope so.

[lyonn]

79. After the House votes to impeach then the Senate must make

a stand, either for or against bush and whoever else is gathered up in the net. It would be fun to watch the likes of Hatch, McCain, Lott, the usual mouth pieces of the repub party trying to explain that bushco didn't lie to the people and Congress from day one up to the present. You know the corp. media couldn't keep from showing the gory details. The World would be glued to their TV.

[pat_k]

88. . . .and explain how nullifying an amendment they passed 90-9. . .

. . .is AOK by them. (i.e., McCain's anti-torture amendment.)

I'd love to hear them explain how, when they passed an anti-torture amendment 90-9, they can defend the unitary executivecy's "right" to turn Americans into torturers.

I'd love to see them scramble to find the constitutional dictate that says "the decider" can do whatever he feels like doing to the legislation they pass -- nullify or amend it with the stroke of a pen, piss on it and refuse to enforce it, whatever he pleases.

Perhaps they never really liked having the sole power to legislate, but with the massive egos most appear to have, I imagine they'd be unlikely to make a case for surrendering their power.

And the Democrats can just point and ask.
"You support torture?"
"You want the USA to remain a war criminal nation that illegally spies on its own citizens?"
"You don't think the People are the sovereigns in the USA?"
"You'll be AOK with Unitary Executive Hillary?

Formal and specific accusations that each Senator must pass judgment on makes it a WHOLE different ballgame. Oh yeah.

We could start taking bets on how fast Republicans would force Bush and Cheney to resign and hand the keys to someone like Danforth. Those guys will be pulling out all the stops to keep it from going to trial in the Senate.

[appal_jack]

91. word-up pat_k!

that's some fine wordsmanship used toward meaningful ends.

-app

[pwb]

8. bullshit

the rubber stamp republicans are blocking everything.

[bettyellen]

84. they have no one's respect now, so they fucked themselves by not even trying

that's how it works, the public is sick of politicians who stand for nothing.
Rahm wants to believe otherwise, but the DLC are screwing the pooch. and losing liberal support by the day.

[pokercat999]

107. Oh contraire, they DO stand for something

THEIR OWN FUCKING RE-ELECTION. Piss on them all, without impeachment I will vote against EVERY incumbent regardless of policy or party!

[pat_k]

108. . . .starting with a primary challenger for Pelosi.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=103&topic_id=289326

[pokercat999]

109. Hmmmm I vote in VA.....lol

[Totally Committed]

9. F*CK Harry Reid and the horse he rode in on!

"We raised the bar too high."

WTF? Oh, really?

Incompetent, weasely, mealy-mouth a**hole.

TC

[Take_The_Red_Pill]

11. Surprised?

What do we expect? Let's be honest, we Dems have been shaggin the dog since 911 politically. We got it but we can't sell it? Hmm, why is that? Maybe because we don't CARE to sell it. Because as long as we get re-elected, what the hell else matters?

Until our party grows a pair and starts governing with some moral claity, until a candidate steps forward and actually produces as opposed to mouthing prepared BS sound bites, the GOP will slaughter us. Because as scary as it sounds, this is really how they are. We can't beat them at their own game, so we need to play ours and that is doing the right thing. Until we start trying that out again, we will lose in everything that matters.

[Totally Committed]

19. No, not surprised at all!

I'm angry as hell that people either buy his "we raised the bar too high", or are expected to just because he says so.

I agree with you about doing the right thing being the right thing to do, but will they do it? I don't think so. It'll take moral courage and leadership and the amount of those things that are found in the House and the Senate these days is not even enough to fill a thimble.

Ugh. I'm so disgusted.

TC

[AspenRose]

36. Welcome to DU.

*nodding head in agreement*

[Deep13]

10. "We raised the bar too high."

Stop giving Bush money!

[pat_k]

30. "Cut the funding" would accomplish nothing. Only impeachment. . .

. . .is capable of stopping men who have proven over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over again that nothing short of removal can stop them -- not our Constitution, not our laws, not the overwhelming will of the people, not investigation and exposure of their intolerable acts.

Win or lose, impeachment is the only act that is meaningful.

And when the Republicans are forced to answer charges of REAL, undeniable, and intolerable crimes against our constitutional democracy, winning is not only possible, it is likely. Many Republicans will not be willing to defend the Pariah in Chief and his puppet master. Many will not be willing to defend Bush's "right" to render them powerless (as he did when he abused signing statements to nullify McCain's anti-torture amendment, which the Senate passed 90-9). Many Republicans are likely to pull out all the stops to escape having to vote on articles in the Senate (i.e., force Bush and CHeney to resign and hand the keys to somebody like Danforth.)

[yardwork]

12. In case any Democratic congress people are reading this, 5 suggestions:

1. Don't ever say that we "raised the bar too high" again.

2. The Republicans control the media. Do something about it. Restore the Fairness Doctrine.

3. The Republicans control the elections. Do something about it. Support Conyers (he's practically out there all alone!). Investigate the corrupt elections. Prevent it from happening again. Get your heads out of the sand.

4. Cut off the money fueling the illegal war in Iraq. Shut it down.

5. Forget bipartisanship. Do what you were elected to do.

[pat_k]

31. Not five. Just one. Impeach Bush and Cheney.

Now. This week.

No investigation required. Bush and Cheney are committing their war crimes in plain sight. They are arrogating Un-American and unconstitutional power unto themselves in plain sight.

The impotent gestures the Democratic Congress have made to date -- gestures they KNOW are incapable accomplishing anything -- drove their approval to lowest level in a decade. Nothing short of impeachment is capable of accomplishing anything real. All else is impotent gesture. Unless they wake up to reality and impeach, their continued impotent gestures will probably lose them not just the White House, but control of Congress too.

In politics, Strong and Wrong beats Weak and Right any day of the week.

Their choice couldn't be simpler.

Impeach and be strong.

Refuse and be wrong.

Impeach to Win. Refuse, You Lose..

[DrDan]

86. you damned right they are satisfied

They have their private planes . . .

They have their big offices . . .

They have their committee chairmanships . . .

They have their gavels . . .

They have no desire nor inclination to do the job that Americans put them there to do!!!!!! and it is so frustrating to see it!!!!!

Corp contributions - that is ALL they care about!

[Doremus]

32. An excellent list. One little problem though.

You're assuming the Dems want to fix anything.


Sadly, each month that goes by with nothing done it looks more and more like they're quite satisfied with status quo. :(

[pat_k]

33. "It's like Deja vu all over again"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=142357&mesg_id=142901

[dkofos]

13. It is time to clean house.

[LeFleur1]

14. Nth Degree

If they (Democrats) had carried the funding bill to the nth degree and let Bush veto it every time they would have at least looked as though they were trying. They gave in to Bush. That was exactly what they were elected NOT to do. That is exactly what the Republicans have been doing since Bush got elected. People could have respected a party that went down fighting. It was the total surrender that got to the people who voted for them.
When people vote in these polls they aren't just disgusted with Democrats. They are totally disgusted with Republicans. Don't let them get away with blaming this all on Democrats. Democrats DIDN't have enough votes to override the veto. But they could have fought the good fight anyway, until it was obvious to everyone that they had done all they could. They chose to run away instead.
Hillary was right to say it is Bush's war, BUT This vote made it look like a bipartison effort. That is sad, not to mentionn disgusting.

[pat_k]

34. Primary challengers who know the meaning of an oath. . .

It's time for ultimatums. If they won't impeach to rescue the Constitution, perhaps they will to rescue their political futures.

Impeach Bush and CHeney or face a primary fight against X.

Where X = person with clout, money, who has had it

Go after Nancy "off the table" Pelosi first. I have no doubt that there is someone who would be a powerful challenger to be be found in San Francisco. Particularly given the fact that Pelosi's "off the table" edict was a slap in the face to the 60% of her constituents who voted for San Francisco's impeachment proposition.

[Demeter]

15. The Democrats Didn't Rise To the Occasion! Bar Too High My ***!

When your child's life is in danger, is the bar too high, or do you die trying?

When all your children and their parents' are in danger, what then?

When you are given the power to right a grievous wrong, and don't even TRY?

DISGUSTING!!!!

[blueworld]

16. The Dems need to do one thing first - VISION!

They need to decide who the hell they are & what they stand for. For years they react to weeny attacks from the GOP or they hold press conferences expressing outrage at the latest GOP scandals. And that's about it.

It's so clear in Gore's book: what do the Dems stand for now? Certainly not what they fought for in decades past. How can they set goals & a workable agenda if they don't know who they are & what they should be fighting for?

I agree about the minimum wage. Certainly it's important but not hardly the hot potato of this entire criminal administration. And IMO, the Dems need to FIGHT MORE, even if they will be vetoed or verbally trashed & they can't win! They need to become such a major pain in the ass that they wear down the scared Repugs who want to be re-elected. Send the damned bills back & back & back until they start getting some cooperation for what the VOTERS decided was the priority! It ain't rocket science! :banghead: :banghead:

[pat_k]

35. Impeaching Bush and Cheney solves the "vision thing"

Only impeachment can stop the bushcheney steamroller. Impeachment is not only demanded by their oath to "support and defend," it would solve their "vision" deficit -- a problem that runs second only to the perception that they are winps.

Impeaching Bush and Cheney solves their Number 1 problem -- the perception that they are weak -- because it would demonstrate commitment and fortitude. Limiting themselves to pea-shooter half-measures incapable of forcing Bush and Cheney to do anything they don't want to, when they have a gun in their pocket that IS capable of stopping them, just confirms the image that Democrats are weak.

Impeachment solves their Number 2 problem -- failure to define overarching principles that inspire -- because it allows them to define themselves as champions of the People's Government and the Constitution -- pretty heady stuff. As long as impeachment is "off the table," Democratic leaders can't accuse Bush and Cheney of their violations in strong terms because it would beg the question "If they are so bad, why aren't you impeaching?" They have trapped themselves in a world of doubletalk and euphemism, and there may be nothing LESS inspiring then strategy-driven doublespeak.

[diamidue]

17. Kunstler:

I found his column today very interesting:

"The air waves and internet sites are full of blather now about ending the "war" and bringing the troops home. The presidential candidates are agonizing over their various positions on the Iraq adventure. I'd like to hear one of them tell me how Atlanta is going to function without Middle Eastern oil, or how Wal Mart will move its merchandise from San Pedro to Lansing without a "warehouse on wheels," or how the thousands of yellow school bus fleets will carry on next September.

Actually, instead, I'd like to hear talk about drastically reforming our zoning laws to discourage any more suburban development or a pitch to allow some of our tax money to fund a US passenger rail revival. I'd like to see a candidate refuse to attend a Nascar race on the grounds that it's an unconscionably stupid fucking waste of energy resources. I'm waiting for one of these birds to tell the American people the truth: you can't have it both ways. you can't get our military out of the Middle East without changing the way we live".

http://www.kunstler.com/mags_diary21.html

[cqo_000]

21. "I understand their disappointment,"

Yah, like hell you do!

[closeupready]

53. Exactly. If people are told that it will actually cost them MORE money to stop the war,

in terms of an less stable oil supply (leading to higher prices), that's all they need to know. Sick how greedy we've all become.

[AzDar]

18. Let's see ...: can't stop the Iraq War; Gonzo still boffing the Constitution;

NO member of the most criminal Administration in U.S. history held accountable for anything; actively helping Bush to shove a wretched 'Immigration Reform' disaster down the throats of the citizenry....Heckuva Job, Harry.

[Tempest]

20. Here's what the Repugs don't understand

Sure we're upset with the Democrats, but it doesn't mean Democratic and Independent voters are going to rush over to the Repug side.

"allowing Republicans to run as the party of change"

I laughed out loud at this one.

[pat_k]

37. And Dems refuse to see that Strong and Wrong beats Weak and Right.

Don't be so sure people won't go running to Republican candidates. Republicans are running against Bush too.

In 1986, Democrats "knew" Iran Contra would take down the Republicans, they just had to play it safe. (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=142357&mesg_id=142901">It's like Deja vu all over again). They trivialived the crimes by refusing to impeach, and then watched, dumbfounded as Poppi Bush took the White House. An outcome that made all the current horrors possible.

Much of the leadership today was in 100th Congress -- the Congress that failed to impeach Reagan and Bush. They forget the past at their peril.

The immediate impeachment of Bush and Cheney is not just demanded by their oath, it is the path to victory. In politics, Strong and Wrong beats Weak and Right any day of the week.

Their choice couldn't be simpler.

Impeach and be strong.

Refuse and be wrong.

Impeach to Win. Refuse, You Lose..

[depakid]

43. I wouldn't laugh if I were you...

With the help of the corporate media, Republicans have been quite successful in coopting what should be Democratic issues (in the public mind)-

And through their actions and inactions, the party "leadership" and their consultants have willingly allowed them to do so

I see nothing whatsoever to indicate that this pattern has changed- or that it's likely to change.

It's almost as if they want to lose....

[Tempest]

44. I'll be laughing all the way to the polls

The Democrats took control of Congress last year on the Iraq war, and I don't see that changing in 2008.

Also take into consideration there's more Repug seats up for grabs than Democrat seats.

[depakid]

48. Famous last words...

I've seen this play all too many times before.

[Exiled in America]

29. Um, "folks" how about we recognize that the truth hurts and keep the pressure on these jackasses---

to act like the CONGRESS we elected.

Right now they are a bunch of fucking do-nothing liars and they don't have my support until they start ACTING out what they promised with courage and dedication.

[pat_k]

38. The ONLY meaningful action is impeaching Bush and Cheney.

Under rule by signing statement anything short of impeachment is impotent gesture.

Each week they refuse to impeach they condemn themselves to impotent gesture. They will confirm the public's perception that Dems are wimps as the bushcheney steamroller just keeps rolling over them. Each week they fail to impeach, the likelihood that they will lose the WH and control of Congress increases.

They'd better wake up to reality soon. Fighting to impeach Bush and Cheney, win or lose, is not just a moral imperative; it is not just the RIGHT thing to do; it is the WINNING thing to do.

[rayofreason]

39. And what about the "culture of corruption"?

What I read is that it is business as usual, and that earmarks are just as popular as in the last Congress.

Plus ca change, plus la meme chose.

[Amonester]

40. Senator Reid, from now on (and it's getting late) you clearly have ...

4 choices:

1) Lead.
2) Follow.
3) Get out of the way.
4) Cower (as in "we raised the bar too high").

Which one do you choose (NOW!)?

[pat_k]

41. It's not "all about" stopping the war; it's "all about" Stopping Bush. . .

. . .and the ONLY way to do that is to impeach Bush and Cheney. Win or lose, it is the only fight that capable of actually DOING something. Under rule by signing statement, all else is impotent gesture.

". . .it is not simply Iraq, although Iraq started Bush's downhill. But it is a gestalt around George Bush. it's being a pariah to other countries; it's people dying in what they increasing find is a vain fight; it's massive budgetary imbalances; it's a lack of compassionate conservatism; it's insecurity in jobs; it's the feeling that people have not been leveled with.
-- Curtis Gans, Director, Center for the Study of the American Electorate

Every poll shows that the vast majority of the public is angry at Bush. The same polls tell us that, like the Democrats themselves, the public is far more ambivalent when it comes to what to do about the quagmire in Iraq (that's the definition of a quagmire, no good way out). Contrary to what many seem to believe, being "against the war" is not the same as "get out."

People are angry at Bush about the War -- disapproval of his handling of it was cited as a major reason for Democratic success by 85%. Far fewer ranked Democratic ideas on Iraq as a major reason (only 61%). In fact, with dissatisfaction Bush (71%), dissatisfaction with Republican spending (67%), and overall dissatisfaction with the Republican Congress (63%) ranked higher as major reasons than Democratic ideas on Iraq. (Since there is no good way out of a quagmire, one would expect many who are angry at Bush's War to be a somewhat ambivalent about what to do now, so these numbers should not be surprising.)

It's not failure to "end the war" that has approval of the Democratic Congress in free fall, it is failure to STOP BUSH. The pretense that something short of impeachment can stop Bush has obscured the the stark reality. But the reality is undeniable. The public wants Bush stopped. Impeachment is the ONLY means to give the public it's wish. Democrats on the Hill and "out here" deny this reality at their peril.

References:

• Curtis Gans, Director, http://spa.american.edu/csae">Center for the Study of the American Electorate
  Politically Direct with David Bender, 10-Nov-06
  (http://podcast.rbn.com/airam/airam/download/archive/2006/11/aapd111006.mp3">mp3 -- Interview start time approx 18:30)


• http://january6th.org/reasons-for-success.pdf">Reason for Democrats success, Newsweek Poll, 6-Nov-06.


• http://january6th.org/oct2006-newsweek-poll-impeach.html">Priorities for a Democratic Congress, Newsweek Poll, 21-Oct-06.


• http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2752103&mesg_id=2753090">58% of Americans want his Presidency over now, Newsweek Poll, 27-Jan-07.

[knight_of_the_star]

42. Damn the Blue Dogs and DLC

Damn those dems who think they have to cross the aisle in the first place to get things done when they don't need to. I honestly think that when the House cut out the timetables and the like from the spending bill that Pelosi voted against said bill said to me that even though she is the Speaker she was undercut by members of her own party who think they need to work with the thugs. Those are the idiots we have to go after, the ones who refuse to do the will of the voters.

[brentspeak]

47. Kucinich isn't a DLCer (or a Blue Dog Dem), but he crosses the aisle all the time

"Crossing the aisle" isn't the problem, here.

[knight_of_the_star]

93. I'm specifically referring to the Blue Dogs and DLC

The ones that vote more often with the other side than with us, not the ones who make compromise when its reasonable but when the talking points dictate they should shove the rest of the party over face-first and withhold the lube.

[Popol Vuh]

46. The "Corporate" party

I've been singing that tune to family and friends for many years now. Its more accurate to say that we only have but one party in this country -the Corporate party- with flavor (R) and flavor (D). Their first loyalty is to the corporation make no mistake. Its the only way they have a decent chance in getting elected in the first place.

So the question is: What can we do about it? My answer has always been to use the Internet and independent media such as KPFK and KPFA radio and alike, and AirAmerica radio, and Democracy now, etc. to organize a mass nation wide general strike. I believe it could be done if enough people in enough of these information outlets got together and worked out a campaign to promote a nation wide mass general strike called "People uprising against corporate politics" or something like that.

In my humble opinion I believe until we the people take action that really affects them they'll only pay us lip service and continue to serve their corporate masters.

[coalition_unwilling]

50. I agree with you almost 100%. The Latinos in LA proved that

a "general strike" can have a hugely mobilizing effect (May 1, 2005). I believe leadership for a general strike must come from organized labor, e.g., SEIU, AFL-CIO and Teamsters.

[Popol Vuh]

52. Agreed

that bringing on board organized labor would be a significant factor. I myself am a member of the ILWU local 13.

:)

[Ex Lion Tamer]

49. No, Senator Reid, you did not raise the bar too high . . .

you just failed to jump when you should have. And now you're just standing there.

[superconnected]

51. Like my wraith. It has to do with that little iraq pull out thingy.

I assume pelosi thinks she got away with it and it will be forgotten, it won't. And I won't support that hag.

[pacalo]

54. I thought I'd heard everything in the twilight zone of disillusionment...

"If Democrats fail to reverse course, the dynamics in the 2008 elections may shift significantly, allowing Republicans to run as the party of change ... only two years after Democrats successfully campaigned on that same theme," Senate Republican leaders told their ranks in a letter last week.

Give those "Senate Republican leaders" a big dose of reality.

I'm disgusted as anyone that the boy king of corruption has been given a free ride, but the wrath should be also be directed at these "Senate Republican leaders" and their rubber-stamping yes-men for the boy king. Get real.

(Please, Al Gore & Wes Clark: step up to the plate; I've got lots of enthusiasm bottled up with nowhere to go.)

[Hissyspit]

55. Newly Empowered Democrats Draw Wrath of Voters

Source: Reuters

Newly empowered Democrats draw wrath of voters
By Thomas Ferraro
Mon Jun 18, 8:38 AM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The new Democratic-led Congress is drawing the ire of voters upset with its failure to quickly deliver on a promise to end the Iraq war.

This is reflected in polls that show Congress -- plagued by partisan bickering mostly about the war -- at one of its lowest approval ratings in a decade. Surveys find only about one in four Americans approves of it.

"I understand their disappointment," said Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record) of Nevada. "We raised the bar too high."

In winning control of Congress from President George W. Bush's Republicans last November, Democrats told voters they would move swiftly to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq. But they now say voters must understand they need help from Republicans to clear procedural hurdles, override presidential vetoes and force Bush to change course.


Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070618/pl_nm/usa_congress_war_dc

[BobRossi]

56. Raised the bar too high?

If the bar were any lower he'd have to dig to get under it. What a coward he is.

[Rydz777]

72. I had exactly the same reaction. What in the world did he mean

by that. Getting out of a disastrous war is "raising the bar too high?" The American people know that the Congress has the power of the purse and the Democratic Party has a majority in both Houses of Congress.

Edwards has it right: set a timetable in the appropriations bills and if Bush vetoes, keep sending him the same bill over and over.

[Zhade]

83. Apparently, keeping sworn oaths to protect the Constitution from criminals is a bar too high.

And people wonder why the rest of the world sees this country as a dangerous, ignorant, cowardly bully.

[pat_k]

101. No. Even Edwards is missing the boat. Only impeachment. . .

. . .is capable of stopping them.

What could possibly lead us to believe that the outlaws in the White House would even think twice about raiding the treasury to do as they please?

They commit war crimes in plain sight; blatantly and illegally spy on Americans; abuse signing statements to nullify law; break the Constitution and U.S. Code at whim to "protect" us; terrorize us into war with the most colossal bomb threat in history: "Mushroom clouds in 45 minutes, laugh at Congressional subpoenas; lie to Congress without a qualm. . .

How can our so-called "leaders" on the Hill imagine that ANYTHING they do (short of impeachment) would stop the bushcheney steamroller?

[ixion]

57. thousands of US deaths, tens of thousands of Iraqi deaths, and billions wasted: understand this:

get us the hell out of Iraq now! :grr:

[partylessinOhio]

58. "We raised the bar too high." Do you think we're stupid?

You need to stand up for the voters and stop enabling Bush! No more excuses!

[ejbr]

70. Senator Reid, Speaker Pelosi, follow Congressman Kucinich's lead

Don't fund the war. You have the power to bring any legislation to the floor. Let these republican ass wipes, kick, scream and shout all they want. Why won't YOU veto the war??! Bush will have no choice but to bring the troops home. Period.

[mike_c]

59. "...raised the bar too high." WTF?

No Harry-- WE raised the bar, WE the voters, WE the people. You and your ilk in congress are simply FAILING to meet your constituents' expectations. As usual.

[rodeodance]

60. this is a myth-------the Dems are NOT empowered with only a slim majority when it takes 67 votes!!

[TwilightGardener]

73. Yep--there's what we want, and then there's political reality.

We must work within that reality. I am not judging too harshly--YET.

[HughBeaumont]

61. Oh just shut the hell up, Harry.

Pretty much convinces me that corporations and omnipotent neo-cons DO run this country, not the people. What the hell is everyone so AFRAID of, once again?

[mopinko]

63. some day.

yeah, sure. shut up is right.

[DBoon]

62. The people who voted for you set the bar

You don't set the bar for us.

"Would it not be easier for the government to dissolve the people and elect another?"
- Bertold Brecht

[DrDan]

64. less than 3 in 10 voters think junior is doing a good job

we hold the majority in the house,

we hold the majority in the senate - at least on paper . .

and junior still gets everything he wants - regardless of cost - both terms of dollars and lives.

Their pathetic excuse for incompetence - "give us more votes so we can have some real power" . . .

I have a feeling it's not going to work in '08.

[demnan]

65. Put impeachment on the table you damned idiots

or we'll impeach the damn lot of ya!

[VanPelt4IndSenate]

66. Impeach Bush NOW!

More of our Dem leaders need to be on this board.

[fasttense]

67. I say this is BS

The approval rating of Congress is down because the Republic senators are standing in the way of ending the war and real progress. Republic legislators act as if they are not involved in this support of the Iraq occupation, as if they hadn't been involved in rubber stamping all things bush for years. Rove managed to rig just enough senate seats to split the senate and keep the "Do Nothing Congress" as a shield.

If we got all these republic politicians out of the way, we could make some progress. Republic politicians are standing in the way of progress and are trying to blame Democratic leaders for their rubber stamp of all things bush.

[LibDemAlways]

68. How typical of the whore press. While I

don't think Harry Reid has the leadership skills necessary to kick ass in the Senate, it's certainly not entirely the fault of the Dems that the war rages on as the article suggests. Why the hell isn't it the fault of the bastards who started this clusterfuck and refuse to even discuss a timetable for withdrawal? The media is as much complicit here as Bush, the repukes in Congress, and their Dem enablers like Lieberman.

[Deb]

69. Did any DUer's Congressman promise to end the war?

None of my Dem reps did. I really don't understand where the "move swiftly to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq" comes from. During the election campaigns a Dem Senate majority wasn't even assured.

[LibDemAlways]

71. It's the media whores rewriting history to

blame this mess on the Dems. Reid coming out with the line about setting the bar too high plays right into their hands. Incredibly frustrating that the American Public is once again being fed repuke propaganda, and Reid is aiding it.

[aquart]

74. Because, I assume, people have learned not to expect a damned thing

from the Republicans. Any mention of that?

[aggiesal]

75. Lieberman is the most powerful Senator, ...

If the dems don't vote to Lieberman's liking (on the war, or budget) he'll switch
control of the Senate to the Repukes.

I'm not trying to make excuses for Harry, and I agree with Edwards plan.
But until we get rid of the e-voting machines, the (R)'s will continue to
claim seats that they didn't rightly win.

Statistics show that the (D)'s should have won about 20-30 more seats in the house
and 4-6 more in the Senate.

[pat_k]

95. The first Senator to unequivocally accuse and call on the House to impeach. . .

. . .will be the most powerful Senator. The first one to become a TRUE champion of the Constitution and the People's Government will be the most powerful. Real leadership transforms.

[Exiled in America]

98. What statistics? Can I get a source (because I'm interested, not challenging you)

[aggiesal]

99. I'll try to find some for you.

[aggiesal]

100. Here is an article worth reading.

http://www.electiondefensealliance.org/landslide_denied_exit_polls_vs_vote_count_2006

[Exiled in America]

102. That's fascinating though not conclusive. That's because:

...people regularly lie about their vote in exit polls.

I know that sounds bizarre maybe, but I worked as a campaign manager in 2006 and understanding how voters operate was part of my job.

There are many situations where people vote one way in the privacy of the booth and then, perhaps due to embarrassment, people will say they voted a different way. If for example, people are in a place that might normally seem very liberal, or they are sounded by a lot of people that seem very liberal they may simply say that they voted democratic, simply to avoid feeling uncomfortable.

There are a lot of other reasons why people are not always honest about their vote.

BUT -- having said that, I believe that exit polls have had a history of quite accurately prediciting the final vote count for a very long time all the way up to what, the 2004 elections? So, I'm also not discounting what exit polls tell us.

[aggiesal]

104. I agree, because of the area people live in might be ...

dominate to one party over the other, and the embarrassment kicks in.

I live in a predominately conservative district of San Diego County. My congressman is Duncan Hunter. Gives you an indication what these people are thinking. I'm proud to say I voted against Duncan.

But others won't.

I think the biggest issue about the article is the mention that in the final 3 weeks, democratic support went up by 17% points. And without this sudden support, the republicans would have held both houses of congress.

What did Rove say? You can look at your numbers, and we'll look at the real numbers! Or something similar. This tells me that they were ready to modify their numbers to be the real numbers.

I couldn't find (limited time) the article that mentioned the number of seats that were stolen, but I'll have more time when I get home. Hope I can find it.

[MessiahRp]

106. I wrote about the Lieberman issue myself

http://www.americanpolitik.com

Rp

[krispos42]

76. Looks like this one is a dupe n/t

[movonne]

77. I am sick to death of these dems...and if we put hillary in it will be

the same as putting in a repug...they are in this take over of everything together...(and I am still not sure of obama)

[CrazyForKucinich]

78. More truth that Kucinich speaks...yet the party won't change.

The exodus will begin. Thank god for Ron Paul.

[Zhade]

81. "We raised the bar too high." FUCK YOU REID.

'Too high'. I had no idea that holding criminals accountable per your fucking Constitutional duties was a bar too high.

As for your advice - NO. I will be just as angry at the Dems for failing to do their jobs as I will Republicans for hindering them. So with all due respect, fuck your suggestion sideways.

[WindRavenX]

82. dude, mad love to you

:thumbsup:

[redqueen]

87. No kidding...

he seems to be trying to lower our expectations. I don't see how that's even possible.

*sigh*

[bread_and_roses]

90. got that in one. what cowards they are. (n/t)

[L0oniX]

85. Screw the 4th of July ...what are we independent of?

Refresh my memory please. We are owned by the corporations. Nothing but a full blood and guts revolution will ever bring this country back. The dems are just as bad as the repukes and they are now feeding at the corporate pig trough.

:argh:

[farmboxer]

92. Corporate news wants to elect Republicans, so how does

that help things. Things are going much better with newly elected Dems, they are not perfect, but sure are better than Republicans. Corporate news wants to trick everyone into voting for their Republican Bush Sheep again.

[Buns_of_Fire]

96. Rocky didn't get to be "Rocky" by taking a dive in the first round.

A lesson the House and Senate "leadership" should take note of.

[ellisonz]

97. I have no faith in the American government or public to extricate itself from its own demise.

:hide:

[natrat]

103. designated party of failure